A Trump Corollary to Monroe Doctrine?
China clear & present danger in Latin America but not in Panama...
Ever since I can remember the U.S. has ignored Latin America as a whole even while Latin America as a whole has obsessed continually about the U.S. But geopolitics may change and eventually possibly reverse that equation. There was a 1904 Roosevelt Corollary to the 1823 Monroe Doctrine that stated the U.S. could and would intervene in Latin America if actions in the latter region “loosened the ties of civilised society”, whereas the Monroe Doctrine allowed for intervention if a foreign power began “controlling in any manner their destiny”. The difference now is the problem relates to trade and investment, not occupation or warfare. A Trump Corollary must be to exert influence in its backyard through trade and investment, or just be polite and wait for an eventual implosion when China’s investment strategy looks less appealing.
Take a look at the shocking contrast 2000-2023 on a map:
Unusually I find I have no answer. It was an error to let China join the WTO and not to pursue its compliance with Western laws of commerce and property rights, and it was shortsighted and suicidal of companies to give up their property rights and become dependent on cheap Chinese labour. And … it’s all been downhill since then.
But maybe for now it would be best to continue ignoring Latin America until their loans from China come due and they return begging for capitalism ¡Tengo hambre, hombre, por favor! Just refocus U.S. military and economic strategies to beat China. History suggests for all the outrage he provokes Trump is the master strategist?
Remember what even the libertarian Javier Milei says:
China is a natural partner for us. And let me tell you something, I was pleasantly surprised by the way that China works with other countries, in that it’s a very friendly partner… it is a trading partner that does not interfere, that causes no nuisance.
Below I will quote a few passages from the article that contains the map — How China Capitalized on U.S. Indifference in Latin America. But first I wanted to draw your attention to a great podcast aired today in which Paul Gigot and Mary Anastasia O'Grady discuss how Donald Trump may ‘treat’ Panama, Greenland, and Canada.
See that little red-coloured country on the isthmus?
Mary O'Grady is lucid in her hostile response to Trump’s threats against Panama. The transcript is here, but I recommend the Podcast.
Extract:
Mary Anastasia O'Grady: Actually, Paul, I tried to brace myself for anything, but this one really came out of the blue for me, particularly going after Panama. I mean, [Trump’s] Canadian rhetoric is really just provocative. Obviously, Canadians have no interest in being part of the United States, and Trump is just blowing off steam. On Panama, though, I think it's more troubling, because Panama is one of our few allies in the region at this point. I mean, so many countries have fallen to the hard left, and here we have an ally that runs a going concern very well, the Panama Canal, and all of a sudden he's picking a fight with Panama and it doesn't make much sense. I think he might at some point realize it doesn't make much sense, but he's not going to back down. He's not going to turn around and say, "Oh, I was wrong." So we're going to have to go through some kind of a kabuki dance between Panama and the United States until he can find his way out of this one.
Paul Gigot: The Panamanian President, José Raúl Mulino quickly said, "We have no intention of turning the Canal over," and said Panama would defend his interest. And to which Donald Trump replied on Truth Social, "We'll see about that." That sounds like a threat. Mary, what do you think? First of all, does Trump have a fair complaint about the fees?
Mary Anastasia O'Grady: I think he does not, and I'll start with the fact that all ships and vessels, no matter the flag they fly, pay the same fees, and those are based on tonnage and type of vessel. They have nothing to do with singling out the Americans to gouge them. The one problem he may be hearing about from shippers is that the drought, which was an El Nino drought, which went from June of 2023 until about the middle of this year, caused the big lake, Gatun Lake, to go down in volume, and that meant there was less water and they could bring fewer ships through the Canal. So they ended up creating something they called the Express Pass, which was an online bidding system for ships that wanted to go faster through the Canal, they could pay more, and other ones who didn't want to pay that would have to wait longer. And obviously, that made a lot of shippers unhappy, but it also wasn't good for the Canal. They lost an estimated $1 billion in revenue during that time. So, they have no incentive to slow down the ships or raise the prices, because they give up their own interests as well. But that was just a reality of nature. They also have to run the Canal, which means not only keeping it maintained all the time, but they have to also put investments into capital expenditures. And one of the strategies they're thinking about is building new reservoirs to deal with this uncertainty of water supply. And if they do that, it's going to cost them probably more than $2 billion. So again, The Canal Authority is run like a business and it's an autonomous institution, and they have to care about their bottom line. So this idea that they're somehow able to gouge Americans with no regard to the outcomes is just blatantly false.
Paul Gigot: Trump also suggested in a Truth Social post, I guess, that the US somehow investing billions of dollars in this. Is that true?
Mary Anastasia O'Grady: No, it's not true. The Canal Authority has to basically run out of its revenue, not just regular maintenance, but also expenditure. So the third set of locks, which started in 2016, was completely done by the Canal Authority, and they issued bonds which were backed by the Panamanian government, but they were Canal Authority bonds, and so they did the whole thing on their own to create those set of three new locks. It is true that the United States widened the Canal before the handover, they put money into widening the Canal.
Paul Gigot: That was in 1999, it was a handover.
Mary Anastasia O'Grady: Right, so it was before that it was widened, but since it's been handed over, the Panama Canal Authority has been the only one responsible for maintaining and investing in the Canal.
Paul Gigot: If the fees aren't a problem, if management here has been run more or less like a business, although it does kick any excess profits to the government of Panama, there's some suggestion that Trump is worried about China and its influence there in the Canal. Of course, China has expanding its influence throughout the Americas, Latin America in particular, and Trump suggested that Chinese soldiers are helping to operate this. It's the first I've heard of that.
Mary Anastasia O'Grady: Again, not true, and actually the Panamanian President answered that on either Christmas day, or the day after Christmas, saying that there are no Chinese soldiers in the Canal zone. There are five cargo ports and two of them are run by a subsidiary of Hutchison Whampoa, which is a Hong Kong company traded on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The other three ports are run by US, Taiwanese and Singaporean commercial interests, but there are no soldiers in the Canal zone from China.
Paul Gigot: Is China, what about overall Chinese influence, right? Hutchison Whampoa is a Hong Kong based company, it used to be an old British trading company, and now local, I believe the shareholders are Chinese, Hong Kong, Chinese, and Hong Kong does answer now to China. How much should we be worried about that?
Mary Anastasia O'Grady: Well, I think it's something we definitely have to keep an eye on, because as you say, the influence of Beijing over Hong Kong and the so-called private sector in Hong Kong is something to worry about. But when I look at that problem and I think, okay, if that is a threat, what Trump should want to do is bring the Panamanian government closer to him and try to work with them to ensure security in the Canal. Instead, he's alienating a center right government, and Venezuela is sticking up for Panama right now, so I don't even understand the chess game. I mean, if he's trying to outsmart them, he's not doing a very good job.
[END OF EXTRACT]
The Monroe Doctrine
We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power, we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.
The Roosevelt Corollary
All that this country desires is to see the neighboring countries stable, orderly, and prosperous. Any country whose people conduct themselves well can count upon our hearty friendship. If a nation shows that it knows how to act with reasonable efficiency and decency in social and political matters, if it keeps order and pays its obligations, it need fear no interference from the United States. Chronic wrongdoing, or an impotence which results in a general loosening of the ties of civilized society, may in America, as elsewhere, ultimately require intervention by some civilized nation, and in the Western Hemisphere the adherence of the United States to the Monroe Doctrine may force the United States, however reluctantly, in flagrant cases of such wrongdoing or impotence, to the exercise of an international police power.
The Trump Corollary … will change direction?
You got to treat us fairly and they haven't treated us fairly. If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America in full, quickly and without question. I'm not going to stand for it. So to the officials of Panama, please be guided accordingly.
[END OF DOCTRINES & COROLLARIES]
How China Capitalized on U.S. Indifference in Latin America
… A leading motivation for Xi’s attention to Latin America and the Caribbean is isolating the democratically governed island of Taiwan. Seven of the 11 nations worldwide that maintain diplomatic relations with Taipei are in the region, including Guatemala, Paraguay and Haiti. Five that switched recognition to Beijing under Xi’s watch, including Honduras and Panama, were showered with Chinese deals. …
… Likely with Taiwan in mind, Beijing has locked in mineral and foodstuff purchase agreements, plus deals to operate ports in such places as Peru and trade in yuan, to fortify supply lines against risks that Chinese militarism one day sparks calls among Western powers to impose an embargo. In such a scenario, Beijing could be expected to offer inducements toward such G-20 nations as Brazil to defuse the kind of decoupling pressure Russia faced after it invaded Ukraine …
… It has been 110 years since the U.S. completed the Panama Canal and over a half-century since Washington sought to check the spread of communism during the Cold War by meddling in Latin America’s democracies. Today, U.S. policymaking toward the region is heavily slanted toward illegal immigration and narcotics, instead of how its more recent general political stability and growing middle class could work to America’s advantage. …
… Washington’s smaller-scale and less deal-oriented engagement has provided space for China to win regional recognition for boldness. When two of the region’s pro-trade nations, Uruguay and Ecuador, got nowhere seeking free-trade agreements with the U.S. near the start of the Biden administration, they turned to Beijing. …
… China hasn’t displaced the U.S. so much as it has taken advantage of uncontested opportunities, said Jorge Guajardo, a former Mexican ambassador to China now with the Washington advisory firm DGA Group. As he puts it, “The U.S. sees Latin America as ‘ours to ignore.’”
The indifference runs counter to a Pew Research Center survey published in July that showed the U.S. has a higher favorability rating than China in the economies of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Peru.
Guajardo said U.S. economic buoyancy makes it the more attractive export market for Latin American and Caribbean nations in the face of slowing Chinese import demand and caution from Beijing on project financing …
… When John Feeley arrived in Panama to serve as U.S. ambassador in early 2016, plans were afoot for a fourth bridge across the Panama Canal, and he wanted an American company in the mix. “The canal is what bound us,” he explained.
Yet, Feeley said his cables to Washington failed to generate much attention to the bridge project. He said he even cold-called the Reston, Va., engineering giant Bechtel to drum up interest. “What I was trying to do was make some noise about this, and I got a resounding silence,” Feeley said. Bechtel didn’t respond to questions.
Panama in 2018 awarded the $1.42 billion project to a consortium of companies owned and operated by China’s government. Beijing’s interest followed Panama’s decision the previous year to sever relations with Taiwan, and Chinese state media trumpeted the bridge deal as the country’s largest such win in the Americas.
The U.S., Feeley said, “looks at Latin America as a problem not an opportunity.”
[… And, history proves, rightly so?]
[END OF ARTICLE]
My thanks to the Wall Street Journal and conservative Condorito
Dr Michael G. Heller
